To What Extent Was King Richard A Failure In The 3rd Crusade

431 Words2 Pages

The 3rd Crusade was a fight between King Richard I and Saladin. The 3rd Crusade was an attempt to retake the ‘Holy Land’ following Jerusalem’s capture. The attempt to regain the land was by King Richard I in (1189- 1192). So how did King Richard fail in retaking ‘The Holy land’ and what impact did it leave off?

The motivation of King Richard I during the 3rd Crusade. King Richard I was said to have a ‘lionheart’ according to britannica.com. Since Saladin captured Jerusalem in 1187, his main motivation was to take back ‘The Holy Land’. King Richard I also fought many fights on the front line, this improved his military skill and fighting skill, not many kings did this in the medieval times. King Richard went on with the 3rd Crusade since his father Philip II each feared that during his absence the other might usurp his territories. Another main motivation for King Richard was that he had to obey the Pope’s call to the free holy land. The Pope also said people would be forgiven for their sins. This would’ve motivated King Richard I because he had killed many people. …show more content…

King Richard I did ultimately well in all his battles. Unfortunately, he had limited resources which came down to him failing to capture Jerusalem. King Richard almost succeeded to lead the crusaders to gain territory, including Cyprus and Sicily. If King Richard gathered more soldiers, he would have succeeded in retaking the Kingdom of Jerusalem. This overall affected King Richard since he had lack of control of his soldiers, this led to Saladin troops virtually destroying the Christian army. According to PDXScholar, King Richard's Christian forces ultimately won the fight, known as the Battle of Arsuf, but they lost the Third Crusade to the

More about To What Extent Was King Richard A Failure In The 3rd Crusade

Open Document